A Blog on Mythology and occasionally on Reality.

Pages

Friday, June 29, 2012

In a couple of
previous article we read about how ones present life was affected due to the
acts of one’s past life, w.r.t. Dhritarashtra and Gandhari from the epic
Mahabharata. Our epics are full of examples of Karmic destiny, especially
Mahabharata. Nearly all characters have been subject to this, including Lord
Krishna.

However, Karna
was one character in Mahabharata whose tragedy had nothing to do with his past
life (or so it seems as nothing has been
found in any texts). His tragedy is due to his being good, yes; all that
goes wrong with him is because he wanted to be of help to someone. Let’s see
how.

It is said that
Karna was training under the great ascetic-warrior, Parashuram (who was also an
avatar of Lord Vishnu). Karna had told him the truth that he was raised by a
charioteer and did not know his caste. Once, Parashuram went off to sleep with
his head on Karna’s lap. A blood-sucking insect bit Karna on his thigh. It
pained Karna, but he did not move, lest it woke up his Guru. When Parashuram
came to know about it, he was shocked that someone could bear so much pain in
spite of all the blood that had been lost. According to him, only a Kshatriya
could have it in him to bear such pain and Parshuram hated Kshatriyas. This
enraged Parashuram so much that he cursed him that, all that he had learnt from
him would go in vain, as he would never be able to use it, especially when he
needed the most.

Isn’t this
tragic? Karna was honest enough to say what he did as he had no clue about his
parentage and by not moving after the insect bite, he was only allowing his
Guru a peaceful nap. Was this fair?

Another legend
says that long ago, Karna saw a young girl crying as she had spilt milk on the
ground. To stop her from crying, Karna is supposed to have taken soil from the
ground where milk was spilt and squeezed out the milk so that the child could
have it. This angered Bhoo-devi
(Earth-deity) and she is supposed to have cursed Karna that it would be the
same soil that would one day, hold him to his death, as he had squeezed out
milk from her soil.

During the war
of Kurukshetra in Mahabharata, at a very strategic point, the wheel of Karna’s
chariot was stuck in the soil and no efforts would get it out of the soil. He
got down the chariot to do so physically, as he had forgotten the magic formula
taught to him by Parashuram to release a wheel if stuck on the ground, is when
he gets hit by Arjuna. His end was brought by the act of kindness that he had
shown to his guru and the crying girl.

This make one
feel that Karna’s tragedy had nothing to do with his karma, but was some sort
of a conspiracy to make sure that he suffers. The following story also lends
credence to the same theory.

Karna’s charioteer
was Shalya, the King of Madra. Shalya was the maternal uncle of the younger
Pandavas, i.e. Nakula and Sahadeva. When Kings and regions were aligning
themselves for the great war of Kurukshetra, Shalya left for the battlefield.
On his way, he was pleased to see that arrangements were made for his army and
was impressed at the thoughtfulness of the Pandavas. Later he learnt that he
had been duped into accepting the hospitality, from the Kauravas, due to which
he had to fight on behalf of the Kauravas. To humiliate him further, Duryodhan
asked Shalya to be the charioteer of Karna, the arch-enemy of the Pandavas. On
Krishna’s advice, Shalya would continuously praise Arjuna during the battle, to
de-motivate and distract Karna.

Also, when
anything goes wrong with a chariot, it is the responsibility of the charioteer
to alight from the chariot and repair it. When Karna’s chariot got stuck on the
ground, Karna is supposed to have asked Shalya to do so, but Shalya refused to
alight as he was a King and it was below his dignity to such things, besides
the fact that he did not know how to get the wheel out of the ground. It was
only when Shalya refused to do anything, did Karna have to alight, disarming
himself, which made him vulnerable to Arjuna’s attack.

All this lends
credence to the theory of conspiracy. Where is karmic destiny here? Karna had
been wronged from the time he was born to an unwed mother, Kunti. All through
the epic he had been insulted about his lack of knowledge of his parentage,
when two of the most important characters of the epic, Kunti and Krishna were
actually aware of it but had opted to keep quiet. He is apprised of the truth
at a wrong moment in the epic and that too as an effort to buy his support. At
the end, he dies a heroic death. It is said that the day he was killed, the war
came to an early end for that day, as all the charioteers from both the sides
mourned his death, as he was raised by a charioteer.

Could the author
of the epic have decided to create a tragic character and thus such
characterisation? Or was it the ideal example of a good guy on the wrong side?

Whatever, be the
case, Karna’s tragedy had nothing to do with his karma.

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

“Hi Utkarsh………, had a question too. Gandhari had 100 sons, as we all know
it takes 9 months for incubating a baby (unless they had machines for the same
at that time) and if she had 1 baby at a time, by the time the 100th would be
born the first one would be 75! So how old was Gandhari during the war? Or did
she give birth to all 100 at the same time? In which case, biologically, it
would be difficult for all 100 to survive. What do you think?”

An
interesting question and often asked by many. How can someone have 100 sons
together or even one after another? Could it be that she had many combinations
of twins, triplets, quadruplets, etc. many times over?

Mythology
is replete with instances which are known as supra-normal births (beyond the
range of normal or scientifically explainable), where births have taken place
from fire, any body fluids, like tears and sweat, or from body parts like
thigh, etc. This is essentially done, to connote a sense of ‘difference’ on the
said character and also to hint that the character is destined to do in-human
acts or feats. This was the then author’s way of assigning an importance to the
character in reference. We will not get into such instances as all heroes in
mythology have had ‘different’ births, like Krishna, Jesus, Hercules, Rama,
Ganapati, to name just a few. Mahabharat is full of supra-normal births, be it
Dronacharya, Kripacharya, Draupadi and her brother, and of course, Gandhari’s
hundred sons.

The
birth of Gandhari’s hundred sons, in brief – After Gandhari had conceived it
was close to two years and she had not delivered. When she heard the news of
Kunti’s children being born in the jungles, she was frustrated and angry and in
her state of rage, she started beating her stomach. Soon she delivered a mass
of flesh. Vyas had once blessed her with a hundred sons (a common blessing in
those days) and when she saw the mass of flesh, he was called. He immediately
instructed her to assemble a hundred jars with ghee (oil) in it. Gandhari at
this stage expressed her desire to have a daughter too. As soon as the jars
were assembled, Vyas divided the ball of flesh into a hundred and one parts and
distributed each into the jars. He asked her to cover them and leave them, and
soon she was the mother of hundred sons and one daughter.

Many
later day thinkers hint at the concept which is better known to us today as
‘in-vitro fertilisation’. Today we know of such methods of IVF and cloning
whereby births can be ‘made’ through artificial methods. I am by no means saying that Vyasa was a gynecologist and nor am I
saying that people then had knowledge of such modern methods of reproduction.
It could just be the figment of a creative writer’s imagination who had
imagined a possibility, without going into the intricacies of the method. Also,
don’t forget what is said at the beginning of the epic Mahabharata – “What
is found herein may also be found elsewhere; What is not found herein does not exist.”

Another
theory says that there weren’t a hundred sons, but just two, i.e. Duryodhan and
Dushsshan. This gains ground as in the entire epic; these were the only two
whose names had cropped up time and again (though later, we have heard of
Vikarna, the Kaurava who was against the war). Also, the pregnancy lasting for
two years lends credence to this theory. People of antiquity had never quite
been able to explain the concept of twins (You can read more about twins in
mythology in my earlier series "Twins – A case of peaceful co-existence. " dated May 1, 2011). The two-year pregnancy
could have been put in to explain the birth of twins.

Another
version is that the evil of Duryodhan was equal to that of hundred people; a
concept similar to that of Ravana’s ten heads which implied his immense intelligence
and knowledge. Mythology, like fiction also thrives on hyperbole and on a more
simplistic note, this could be just that.

Another
version takes the help of etymology (the study of the origin of words).
Duryodhan means one who is difficult to fight, (‘duh’ – difficult & ‘yodh’
– to fight) representing ego & Dushasana means difficult to control.
Representing ‘huge ego’ and ‘lack of control’ as a hundred only gave a sense of
proportion to the immense trouble that the duo could unleash.

A philosophic
explanation is as follows – Dhritarashtra represented blind mind and Gandhari
represented blind intellect following the blind mind. Together they breed unfulfilled
desires, dreams and ambitions, all unleashed on what stood for reason and law
(dharma). The result of such a clash could only be a war of epic proportions!

The
sheer beauty of what the authors of antiquity wrote is brought out by such
representations, which to a rationalist mind might seem ridiculous and
jest-worthy! Modern thinking should be used to understand the deeper meanings
in the myths and not to look down and make fun of what was written way back,
when ‘science’ was not a subject. I guess this is what education is all about!

Monday, June 25, 2012

In a previous
article - Dhritarashtra of Modern Times
(dated June 12, 2012), we read about the karmic
destiny of Dhritarashtra. How it was destiny that made him blind and made him
endure the death of a hundred sons. Mahabharata has numerous such examples which
give similar reasons for ones suffering in the present life.

From
Dhritarashtra, let’s move on to Gandhari. Why was she destined to live a life
of blindness, when she was not naturally blind and why did she have to endure
such tragedy?

Dhritarashtra and Gandhari

Gandhari was the
daughter of Gandhar, the modern day Kandahar, in Afghanistan. She tied a cloth
on her eyes when she came to know that her would-be husband was born blind and
vowed never to see what he couldn’t. Many say that she made a mistake and if
she had not done this, she would have been a great help to her blind husband,
and the course of Mahabharata would have been different. Gandhari’s logic
however, was that she did not want to seem superior in any way from her husband
and make him feel small, and this act of hers had made her his equal. Some even
say that she did this as a silent protest to the high-handed behaviour of
Bhishma, who despite Dhirtarashtra’s disability had nearly forced the King of
Gandhar to agree to the alliance. In the modern world, her act could be
questioned, but in Mhabharata, she was hailed as an ideal woman.

Her blindfold is
supposed to have given her an inner view to the world around her and though she
missed a lot, she never lost ‘sight’ of the fact that the Pandavas were not
treated justly. On many occasions she is known to have advised her husband and
chastised her son Duryodhan. At the end of the war of Kurukshetra, she is
supposed to have asked Lord Krishna, whom she blamed for the war and the death
of her hundred sons, especially Duryodhan, as to what had been the reason for
such a tragic life.

According to
Lord Krishna, long back, while cooking rice, she had poured hot water of the
boiled rice on the ground outside her kitchen. This hot water killed all the
hundred eggs laid by an insect. This act of hers had earned the wrath of the
mother insect who is supposed to have cursed her that she too would have to
endure the deaths of her sons, as she had. (In
many villages women are advised not to pour hot water from the rice on the
ground; they should pour it after it has cooled down or mix cold water before
draining it off!). According another local rendition of Mahabharata from
the East, she was cursed by the mother turtle whose eggs, Gandhari had once
crushed one by one.

The above is a
classic case of karmic destiny which has been illustrated time and again
through various characters of Mahabharata. Rather, it seems to be an underlying
theme of Mahabharata. This might have been done by the authors of the times to
ensure that one takes care of one’s actions in the present life. Even if this
is done out of a fear for the results in the next life, one will ensure that he
or she does little or no harm. How would one react to ones shortcomings in this
life? Well, one school of thought would feel that if the karmic theory is to be
subscribed to, then people would stop making efforts to change the hardship and
simply live with it. Contrary to this, one can say that one would accept it as
destiny and not be unnecessarily self-critical. Accept and move on to face the
new challenges that have been in store!

I guess this
theory of Karmic destiny is a case of glass half full!

There are a
number of such characters in Mahabharata, who were what they were, due to the
theory of karma. All but one, who was a tragic character for no theory of
karma.

Friday, June 22, 2012

Yesterday, we read about the
legends and myths associated with the Lord Jagannath, Lord of the universe, and
the chariot procession. Today we will read about its origin and the cult of the
Jagannath worship.

The legend of
King Indradyumna is taken from the Skanda Purana, besides the same being
referred in many other Puranas like Padma Purana, Brahma Purana and Narada
Purana amongst some of them. We are also told that Lord Jagannath is mentioned
in the Vedas and King Indrayumna was some Vedic figure. The Rig Veda has some
hymns which refer to the floating of a wooden log from which was carved out the
idol of Jagannath.

What is
interesting is the idols of the triad. Usually the idols of all gods in the
Hindu pantheon are well defined and perfectly carved or painted. But the idols
at Jagannath temple are not so. It is not shapely and is like a wooden stump
with large round eyes, painted in dark garish colours and the lack of body.
However, all this has been associated with the story of the unfinished idols.
But at the end of the day, it has looks which defy its association with the
prevailing Hindu gods and goddesses.

A Savara couple

Many scholars
have opined that the worship of Jagannath has tribal origins. In the myths
discussed yesterday, there has been mention of a Savara tribe, who were
considered to be the earliest inhabitants of the Odisha. The Savaras were a
tree worshiping tribe, which was a very common mode of worship (tree or stumps
which resemble a tree-like structure), for many tribes in the world. The
Savaras used to worship trees, and singing and dancing in front of their god, Jaganata, was part of the rituals. The
scholars feel that with the migration of the Aryan communities in such areas,
the ritual harmonised into a common festival and the tribal Jaganata soon metamorphosed into the aryanised Jagannath, with Vedic and
Puranic attachments.

Another very interesting
aspect of this is the sudden emergence of a triad from the single god. All
myths begin with a single god, be it Nilamadhava or Jaganata. But somewhere the
single god transforms into a triad. One of the versions given by scholars was
that in the earlier days the Lord Jagannath was seen with his consort, Lakshmi.
Somewhere, to appease a section of the Shaivas, Balabhadra or Balarama was
added to the couple, but this posed another problem. According to the Oriya
convention, the elder brother could not see the face of the younger brother’s
wife. This convention made the consort make way for the sister, Subhadra in
this case! Such things happen to accommodate more deities or could even be an
act of appeasement of other communities or tribes in the widely followed cult.

Nila Madhava Temple at Kantilo

According to
some British scholars, the association of the colour blue, Nila, in the myths of Nilamadhava
and Nilanchal, could be ascribed to
the common use of the easily available blue coloured stones which were usually
used for making idols during the ancient times. In the earlier days, the gods
were offered raw and uncooked food. With the slow aryanisation, the rituals of worship has become more Brahminical
and cooked food is offered to the deities today. But a close scrutiny of the
rituals will reveal that a lot of practices of tribal origin still prevail. It
is pertinent to mention here that the worship of the original Nila Madhava is
prevalent in the hill-top region of Brahmachala, on the banks of the River Mahanadi
at Kantilo, in Nayagarh district of Odisha even today!

Finally, the
worship of Jagannath is performed by a tribal community who are the hereditary
servitors of the Lord. They also observe the funeral rites of the Lord during
the Nava Kalevar and also own all
responsibility of the yatra. What is
further interesting is that these priests are non-Brahmin, which goes on to
show that though the Aryans went on to own the deity, the tribal community
continued to own the rights to serve the deity.

The Jagannath
worship is a classic example of synthesis of two different cultures and
background and a harmonised association of both coexisting in modern times. A
perfect coexistence of Vaishnavite and Tribal cults. This could be one rare
instance of a tribal deity being given such prominence in the Hindu pantheon,
even though its prominence has Vedic and Puranic leanings.

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Today is the
famous Ratha-yatra festival in India
which is celebrated with much fanfare in Puri, Odisha and other Eastern parts
of India. Lately, the festival is celebrated in many other parts, under the
aegis of ISKCON group.

Last month, I
had written a few articles on the similarities of our Ratha-yatra with similar yatras in Nepal and Egypt (http://www.utkarshspeak.blogspot.in/2012/05/ratha-yatra-in-india-and-abroad-part-2.html ). But today we will focus on myths and
legends of the Puri Ratha-yatra.

According to the
most prominent legend from Skanda Purana, after the war of Mahabharata, King Indradyumna
was very intrigued when a travelling pilgrim told him about the practice of
worshipping of Nila Madhava (Blue
Vishnu) in the region of Nilanchal
(Blue Mountains) in the present day Odisha. The next day, Vidyapati, the kings
brother set out for the region to have a look at the deity. The Savara king of
the region, received Vidyapati and assured him to take him to see the deity the
next day, but under the condition that he would be blindfolded to and from the
temple. Vidyapati agreed, but took some mustard seeds in his pocket, in which
he had made a small hole. The entire route to the temple was strewn with
mustard seeds so that the route would be marked with mustard flowers for him to
seek out the way next time he wanted to go.

Later Vidyapati returned
to his region and told the whole story to King Indradyumna, who then set out to
see the deity by himself. On reaching the spot, they were surprised to see that
the deity was missing and the whole area was covered with sands from the nearby
shore. The King came back dejected. Later he was told by Narada Muni to perform
Ashwamedha Yagna to appease Nilamadhava.
On the completion of the yagna, they
heard a divine voice tell them that his prayers have been answered and that
they would find a log floating on the waters soon, which would have divine
marks like a conch-shell, etc. The king should carve out images of three gods
and install and worship the same. Soon after they found a log of wood floating
with such marks and the log was of neem
tree. Around the same time an old Brahmin came from nowhere and suggested that
he could do the work best as he understood the divine marks, but with a
condition that he would do it behind closed doors and would not come out of the
room till the idols were ready and nobody should come in before it was ready.

Soon the carving
started and everybody grew curious day by day, just as were the King and his
Queen. One day they heard no sound coming from behind the doors and the Queen
was sure that the old Brahmin was dead. She ordered the doors to be opened. As
soon as the door was opened, the old Brahmin vanished from there and there were
only the unfinished idols. Since that day, the unfinished idols have been worshipped
in the same form. Many say that the old Brahmin was none other than the divine
architect, Lord Vishwakarma, himself.

The idols are
made of wood, so the idols have to be replaced once in a while. The idols are
replaced in the years when there are two Ashad
(June/July) months, as per the Hindu calendar, which comes once in 24 years in
a well marked event known as the Nav
Kalevar. The belief is that in such a year the earth and the universe
undergoes some change in its shape and form, and thus the Lord of the universe,
Jagannath too receives the same change. The old idols are buried in the temple
premises. The present idols were last replaced in the year 1996. The new idols
continue to be made, coloured, carved, etc. in the same manner as the original.

The temple is
the house for Lord Krishna, as Jagannath, his brother Balabhadra or Balarama
and their sister Subhadra. According to a legend, Lord Jagannath had once
expressed his desire to spend a week at his aunt’s house. About two kilometres
from the Jagannath temple is the Gundicha Mandir, which is supposed to be the temple
of the aunt of Lord Jagannath. Since then, every year on the Ratha yatra day,
all the tree deities are taken out in a grand procession in three different
chariots to Gundicha Mandir. There the deities are taken inside the Gundicha
Mandir where the triad rest for a week and return to the Jagannath temple in
what is known as the ‘ulta-rath’ or
the reverse-chariot.

Some versions say
that Subhadra wanted to meet her parents in Dwarka and the procession is to
mark this occasion. Some other versions say that Kansa, Krrishna’s uncle had
sent his messenger Akrur, to fetch Krishna to Mathura from Gokul. All of
Krishna’s friends and his gopis
blocked the way and Krishna had to pacify them that he would not be harmed. The
ratha-yatra is also supposed to be in commemoration of this separation of Lord
Krishna from Gokul and his childhood friends and gopis.

Yet another
local version says that the mortal remains of Lord Krishna was transformed in a
wooden log which was found by a local Savara (an aborigine of the region) who
started worshipping it. Later King Indrayumna took it from him and carved out
three idols out of it and established a temple for the same.

There are many other
legends associated with the Lord and his chariot. But what is interesting is
the origin of the cult of Jagannath and his worship. This we will discuss next.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Ms. Kiran Bedi
has compared our Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh with Dhritarashtra of Mahabharata. [Ms.
Bedi tweeted – “PMO clears PM. Did Dhritarashtra in Mahabharata not support
Kauravas even after they attempted to disrobe Draupadi? Indian genes/culture?
Or?”]

Dhritarashtra
was the blind king of Hastinapur who was put on the throne after his younger
brother, Pandu, had to go to the forest to atone for his sins and his
subsequent death. He was also the father of the hundred Kauravas.

Is the
comparison valid? Let’s see.

Dhritarashtra
was blind and thus could not see; our PM is not blind (at least physically),
but he still cannot see; else he would have done something about all the wrongs
that are happening in his PM-dom.

Dhritarashtra
was blind to the aspirations of (his son) Duryodhan and despite knowing about
the wrongs done by him, said nothing. Our PM was also well aware of the
wrongdoings of some of his ministers (thankfully not his sons), take Raja for
instance, but allowed him to continue, till the ant became an elephant, and it
could not be hidden under the carpet.

Dhritarashtra
did not say anything when Draupadi was being disrobed in public in the court
just as our PM is keeping mum when the country is being robbed off its pride
and being abused by many known to him.

Dhritarashtra
did not have any friends who could guide him, but had many who would mislead
him. PM too has no friends who can guide him, but is surrounded by allies who
actually misguide him and have their way, as and when required. This lack of ‘good
and true’ friends has been the bane of both Dhritarashtra and the PM.

Some differences
though –

Dhritarashtra
did have some voices of sanity which used to try to dissuade him from following
the wrong path, like Vidura, PM has none. There is not a single guide in his
cabinet whose sane voice he can follow.

Dhritarashtra
always aspired to be the King, in spite of his disability, i.e. his blindness,
but our PM is a reluctant politician, who knew well about his disability, i.e.
lack of knowledge of politics, but went on to take the position of
leadership. Needless to say, that both have proven to be poor leaders.

To conclude, let
me tell you a small story which many might not know.

At the end of the war of
Kurukshetra and on the death of his hundred sons, Dhritarashtra asked Lord
Krishna as to why was he destined for such a tragic life, of blindness and
bereavement of hundred sons during his life time? Lord Krishna asked him to
close his eyes and Dhritarashtra saw, that in his previous life, he was a
tyrant king. Once he was passing by the sea and saw a swan surrounded by a
hundred cygnets (baby swans). On a moment of sadistic pleasure, he ordered that
the eyes of the swan be gorged out and all the cygnets be killed. This cruelty
had led him to be blind in this birth and was made to bear the death of his
hundred sons, just as he had done to the swan. Dhritarashtra realised that this
was his karma and none were to be
blamed for this.

Dhritarashtra’s
behaviour was due to his karma, but
what is the cause of your behaviour Mr. PM?

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

According to a
legend from Mahabharata, during the thirteenth year of the exile of the
Pandavas, Draupadi saw a ripe jambul,
roseapple, hanging from a tree. She plucked it to have it. No sooner had she
done this, Krishna came from somewhere and stopped her from eating it.
According to Krishna, the ripe fruit was supposed to be the fruit with which a
sage was supposed to break his twelve-year fast. Not finding the fruit at its
place, could earn the wrath of the sage, resulting in more trouble for the
Pandavas and her. Draupadi begged of Krishna to help her out of this impending
problem.

Krishna, then
said that the fruit could be put back at its original place, only by someone who
holds no secrets. Draupadi had only one option and to confess some guilt.
Seeing no way out, Draupadi walked up her husband’s and confessed to them, that
though she was a chaste woman and loved all the five husbands, there was
someone else that she longed for. She always had loved and respected Karna, the
arch-enemy of the Pandavas. This was a shock to all the husbands, but none said
anything. Having confessed, she went and put the fruit back on the branch of
the tree and all was well.

A simple story,
and not mentioned in many versions, but considered to be an important episode
in many folk renditions of Mahabharata and sometimes better known as ‘Jambul-akhyan’, the jambul-episode. Many well known authors and re-tellers of
Mahabharat have explored this angle of Draupadi. All popular versions have
mentioned that Draupadi did not love all five husbands equally (not possible
for anyone to be capable of equitable love), and that she loved and longed for
Arjuna more amongst all the brothers. However, it is also true, that Arjuna had
never reciprocated the emotion as he was more in love with Subhadra (Krishna’s
sister) than anybody else. The hidden love of Draupadi for Karna is something
that has been explored by many writers. Some have even justified the romance,
in the sense that the powerful and the dynamic character of Draupadi could find
her match only in Karna and not in the five brothers, who were ‘incomplete’
without one another. It is said that even Karna had regretted his behaviour
during the disrobing of Draupadi in the Kuru court after she was wagered and
lost in the dice-game, and the behaviour was more to avenge his insult during
the swayamvar of Draupadi. The undercurrent
of an unexpressed romance has always been suspected in the entire Mahabharat.

This myth has
dual purpose. One is that everyone has secrets which they keep to themselves.
Some of them are not revealed out of fear of antagonising ones loved ones and
the fear of losing them if the secret is out. Sometimes it is not revealed as
it would upset the apple cart, so as to say. In this case, it did shock the
five husbands, but they respected the honesty and the forthrightness of
Draupadi and more so because of the cause of revealing the secret, i.e. to
avoid earning the wrath of the fasting sage. The significance of a confession
is well brought out and the fact that it only does well and seldom any harm.

The second
purpose is that through this myth, the Pandavas also get the message that in
spite of five brave husbands, they had failed their wife when she needed them
the most. When Draupadi was being disrobed after she was lost in the dice-game,
none of the ‘brave’ husbands could come to her rescue. It brought out the
weakness amongst each one of them, and that Draupadi had a soft corner for
someone who was more a man than the five of them. This was an insult which they
had to bear without any malice towards their wife. Also, being the wife of
five, made her that much vulnerable to such acts, than it did to their own
wives, which each had taken for himself.

If Draupadi had
married Karna would this have happened?

The question
could well be, would Mahabharata have happened?

This is the season of Jambul’s. Go get one for
yourself and eat it. If it stains your tongue, then it means you too are
harbouring a secret!!!

Friday, June 1, 2012

Show me a man
who doesn’t like mangoes and I’ll show you someone with faulty taste buds!
Mangoes – the ripe, luscious, fruits which have something in them, that makes a
child out of a grown-up man or a woman (lest I be accused of being sexist!). Mangoes,
ripe or raw are a culinary delight. This King of fruits is an all time King of
good times (no pun intended!).

There are other
fruits in the market, but none hold sway on man and its kind the way mangoes
do. Have you ever heard crates of bananas being sent to a daughter’s in-laws
house? Have you ever brought crate-full of apples and had them for breakfast,
lunch and dinner and look forward to the same for the next day too? Have you
ever seen any other fruit evoking such erotica the way a certain lady squirms
on your TV screen with a ripe mango? So what is it about the fruit that makes
one go all out for it.

The answer lies
in antiquity, like all quests lead you to!

According to a
Vedic myth, Surya bai, the daughter
of the Sun god was transformed into a golden lotus to avoid being troubled by
an evil sorceress. The sorceress was angry when she found out that the King of
the land had fallen in love with the lotus, so she burnt the flower to ashes.
Love triumphed as a beautiful mango tree grew from the ashes of the flower and
Surya bai stepped out of a mango
which was found on the ground. The King recognised his love and the two were
united.

Lord Buddha was
given a whole mango grove for him to rest whenever he wanted to. Since then the
mango tree was considered as a wish fulfilling tree. Mangoes are considered to
be a symbol of love. The Mango leaves are considered auspicious especially in
marriage rituals, which are used to assure the birth of sons. It is said that
whenever there is a birth of a son, the mango tree bears new leaves. Lord
Ganesh is seen carrying a ripe mango in one of his hands as a sign of
attainment, the aspiration of every devotee of his. In Kalidasa’s Shankuntala, Kama,
the god of love is supposed to have used the flowers of the mango tree to
invoke love between Shakuntala and King Dushyant through one of his arrows.
Goddess Ambika from the Jain mythology is traditionally shown as sitting under
a mango tree.

This takes us to
one of the most important sites of Shaivite centres of devotion, the
Ekambareswar Temple at Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu. Translated literally, ‘Eka’ means one and ‘amaram’ means Mango tree, together, Ekambaram means One Mango Tree and Ekambareshwar means god of the one mango tree. The temple was built
during the Pallava rule and completed by the Chola rulers. But there is
mythology around the temple and one of the most important area of the premises,
which has a mango tree!

It is said that
once goddess Parvati was doing penance under the mango tree in the temple
premises. To test her devotion, Shiva sends fire at her. Parvati took the help
of Lord Vishnu, who with the help of the rays of the moon managed to cool the
tree as well as Parvati. Shiva then sent the river Ganga to disturb Parvati’s
penance. Parvati convinced Ganga that they were sisters and that she should not
disturb her penance, to which Ganga agreed. Parvati then made a shiva-linga out of the sand and got
united with Shiva. Shiva here came to be known as the Ekambareshwar or the god of the Mango tree.

A depiction of the myth at the temple premises

The Mango tree at the temple premises

The tree in the
premises is said to be the same tree under which Parvati performed her penance.
The tree is sacred and unique in the fact that the four branches of the tree
represent the four Vedas and it is said that the tree bears four different
kinds of mangoes in four different seasons. (What is not mentioned however is that it is highly possible that
someone in the days of yore had probably done some intelligent tree-grafting,
which has survived till date – but then followers of faith do not see
eye-to-eye with the doubting-Thomases of the modern world!).

Mangoes have not
been a topic of discussion just in mythology and religion. The uniqueness of
the fruit is supposed to have first travelled outside India, during the travels
of the Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsang who is considered to be amongst the first
to take the tales of the fruit outside India. Later the Portuguese took the
fruit out to other parts of the world. There are numerous Indian folk-tales
which have the eating of the mango associated with miraculous child-birth and
seduction. There are legends about the royal courtesan in the kingdom of the Vaishalis, who came to be known as Amrapali since she was found under a
mango tree. (But then that is a story from history and we will not discuss that
here at the moment).

To conclude on a
doubting note; according to many scholars, the story of Adam and Eve took birth
in the tropical zones which are not conducive for the growth of apples and
pears. What could be highly probable, keeping in mind the tropical weather, was
that the fruit could be either the papaya or a mango; papaya being highly
improbable as a fruit of seduction (!), could it have been the mango, which
hasn’t quite lost that charm even now?

About Me

Utkarsh has qualifications in Mythology, both Indian and World from Mumbai University. He is also a faculty on the subject of Comparative Mythology, at the Mumbai University, India. Utkarsh is also a regular trainer and lecturer on varying subjects at private organisations and educational institutions.

Utkarsh has more than 2 decades of experience in Sales and Business Development of IT products and solutions. He has worked with some of the well known IT organisations, some being start-ups, in India. Utkarsh is also a regular trainer and lecturer on varying subjects at private organisations and educational institutions.

Besides his Blog he is also a content provider to a few portals on similar subjects. Some of his short stories have been published in the well known literary story Blog, called LITIZEN. Utkarsh has also written a book on the subject of mythological-fiction, and working on another one, both of which are expected to be published in the next few months.